I was recently given two Petri 7 cameras. After years of not owning or using one, two come along like buses. One was a swap, and one was a gift. I was told the latter did not work, but the former did. On testing, I found that information to be slightly false.

Let’s start with the Petri 7, which comes first in the line. It was produced from 1961 and looked a lot like the Canonet.

The shutter worked at all speeds. The light meter worked, the needle in the viewfinder reacting to light as it should. The asa dial could be set from ASA10 to 200. The winder was smooth and the counter worked. BUT, there was one big issue…

I could not see through the lens at all. There were scratches, haze and fungus on the front and back. I decided to give it a ‘harsh’ clean. I used a fine glass polish on all elements I could access. The photos at the top of the post are after cleaning. Here is a closer look…

There was some improvement, and more light came through, but it was still looking quite awful. I decided to put a part roll through it, just out of curiosity.

Well, there are images but the cleaning has altered the focusing at the edges. The haze is still there, too. I was happy to finally try a Petri, but it reminded me of the first Canonet I tried. Even if it had a perfect lens, I am not sure I would have liked using it. Given its condition, I will assign this one back to the junk bin. Unless someone reading this wants it for free. I will keep it for a month before stripping it for screws.

How about the Petri 7s? I was told this one had light leaks among other issues. The 7s was a replacement for the 7 and was produced a year later in 1962. This is a later version as the aperture ring is all black, not the earlier silver and black. The production ended in 1973 as a Petri 7s II was released. I read somewhere that it was very similar in looks to the Minster III, and I agree.

The 7 and the 7s look almost identical except for the top cover, which has a light meter indicator and a covered frame counter. This version added 400asa to the settings.

You can see by the viewfinder that this example was much cleaner, the lens was in much better condition, though it still had issues. I have looked online at selling sites, and this seems to be a very common issue. Many descriptions say haze, fungus or cleaning marks.

I gave this camera a very light cleaning and added new seals. The advance had a strange quirk. It made a loud noise and ‘bumped’ when it reached the end. I thought it might be activating the shutter, but the button did that as normal. I was sure the camera wasn’t working, but I decided to use it anyway. I wouldn’t know for sure unless I did. I loaded it with a short roll of Amsterdam Now 100 and took it on a lovely day out. I completed a walk around Thixendale and a visit to Bempton Cliffs with a friend. Plus a short wander around St Michael & All Angels, in Skelbrooke.

Here are the results.

Well, those results are much improved over the first camera’s. All the shots were taken at infinity, so I can’t attest to the focusing at closer distances, but I have no doubts that I will try this camera again. The new light seals seem to have solved any light leaks. The strange advancement noise continued throughout the film, but made no difference to the results. This one is a keeper for now. I think the results are amazing, but the locations were stunning, and I think most cameras/films would produce great results in those areas.

I am so happy Spring has sprung, and I can get out and about more.